You can even set the old doc format as the goddamn DEFAULT to save files in.
The best thing about Office 07 is that it exposes a lot more functionality than older versions did, in a very logical format. Amazingly useful things like "Track Changes" that even an intermediate user couldn't find earlier, can now be used by a newbie.
As for REMOVING those hidden details, well, there's a great little "Inspect Document" feature that allows you to completely remove them.
Much like a recently patched (again) exploit that affected 98, NT, 2000, XP and Vista. Seems somewhat odd that an operating system that has been completely rewritten at great expense and effort should be affected by the SAME bug that has been in their products for years.
1. The OS was NEVER completely rewritten. Stop spreading FUD. A complete rewrite would mean zero or monimal backwards compatibility -- see OS 9 vs OS X.
2. The exploit was far less severe in Vista with IE protected mode than in Vista with Firefox OR XP and below with both IE and Firefox. Says something, doesn't it?
Vista has parental controls to control access to specific accounts at specific times, etc. This gets twisted in TFS to say that Vista has parental "spyware". Nice FUD.
Anecdotal evidence != very reliable data. Here's another piece of anecdotal evidence: I use Vista myself and love it. I know three persons with Vista, and they like it too -- especially the integrated instant search, and Aero.
Before he bought Vista, I tried giving Ubuntu 6.10 to one of them and he didn't like it at all. Several of his devices, including his wifi, didn't work. Several things (like hibernate) were horribly broken in my install of Ubuntu as well, enough for me to stop using it completely. Do I go out and say that Ubuntu is a failure? No. I just accept that I don't have the time and patience to set it up, and would rather spend money on an OS that starts working within an hour. (The Vista installation is goddamn fast.)
How do you define the number of exploits? The absolute number over the years doesn't matter TODAY. If it is the number of serious unpatched exploits, Windows Vista currently has ZERO, just like OS X and Linux.
Just as you said, patches != exploits. I'll go a step further and say that patched exploits != exploits.
Haven't you learnt already? He's a troll. That's all. Set him as a foe, set foes to -6, and be done with it. It's useless conversing with this guy and his sockpuppet.
This risk is still there with current domains. In fact, it should be easier with the.bank TLD -- just make sure that there are *no*.bank entries in the hosts file.
As TFA has stated, this is not a silver bullet. It won't magically solve all the problems with phishing. However, this, along with user education, can ameliorate the situation. For example, a newbie can be told to make sure that the word "bank" appears before the first slash, and so on. Not perfect, but definitely better than the current system.
...as someone's said above, this is overstepping rational bounds, not legal ones. The article is negative publicity for Flickr. Now a person may think twice before posting something there.
Hmm. As for Creative, an alternative driver does exist, the latest beta (3538m, find it in the forum) of which does support Vista on all SoundBlaster Live! and other unsupported cards. They work great.
I'm aware that there are other devices that don't work with Vista, but I've got all of mine (some of which are quite old) to work, either with Vista-supplied drivers, or with Windows XP drivers. The situation is hardly as bad as it is sometimes made out to be.
On what? That IE7 was developed independently of Vista?
Of course it was developed independently. It was released long before Vista was.
Microsoft has been saying for 10 years that IE is INSEPARABLE from Windows.
They are correct in a sense.
While IE can be removed from Windows XP (I'm not sure about Vista) using XPlite, doing so breaks a lot of other things in Windows (help files etc). Trust me, I've tried it.
Any flaw in IE is a flaw in Windows.
I can see the argument for it, although I'll disagree. When I say "Vista" I mean the kernel + the subsystems (graphics, audio, network etc) + the security layer (UAC, digital signatures). The internet browser bundled with the OS -- especially when it is made available for another couple of OSes, and the development team is not part of the Vista development team -- doesn't count as part of the OS.
Plus, you have the choice of browser. You do not have the choice of subsystem or kernel.
The help files are non-essential stuff, so you can technically use Vista or XP without ever seeing IE. I cannot say the same for the other things.
Indeed, none of the flaws were in Vista itself. If I'm reading the bulletin correctly, all of the flaws were in IE7, which was developed quite independently of Vista.
Slashdot Mirror
Compatibility Pack
Word Options -> Save -> topmost option "Save files in this format".
Stop pulling such nuggets out of your ass.
You can even set the old doc format as the goddamn DEFAULT to save files in.
The best thing about Office 07 is that it exposes a lot more functionality than older versions did, in a very logical format. Amazingly useful things like "Track Changes" that even an intermediate user couldn't find earlier, can now be used by a newbie.
As for REMOVING those hidden details, well, there's a great little "Inspect Document" feature that allows you to completely remove them.
You want to see sandboxing? IE on Vista. Durr.
Much like a recently patched (again) exploit that affected 98, NT, 2000, XP and Vista. Seems somewhat odd that an operating system that has been completely rewritten at great expense and effort should be affected by the SAME bug that has been in their products for years.
1. The OS was NEVER completely rewritten. Stop spreading FUD. A complete rewrite would mean zero or monimal backwards compatibility -- see OS 9 vs OS X.
2. The exploit was far less severe in Vista with IE protected mode than in Vista with Firefox OR XP and below with both IE and Firefox. Says something, doesn't it?
I don't get you. I just renamed an exe file to wav, and double clicked it, and VLC opened, but didn't play it. What?
Vista has parental controls to control access to specific accounts at specific times, etc. This gets twisted in TFS to say that Vista has parental "spyware". Nice FUD.
I may have been desensitised a bit, but I REALLY can't see what's so funny about your post.
Anecdotal evidence != very reliable data. Here's another piece of anecdotal evidence: I use Vista myself and love it. I know three persons with Vista, and they like it too -- especially the integrated instant search, and Aero.
Before he bought Vista, I tried giving Ubuntu 6.10 to one of them and he didn't like it at all. Several of his devices, including his wifi, didn't work. Several things (like hibernate) were horribly broken in my install of Ubuntu as well, enough for me to stop using it completely. Do I go out and say that Ubuntu is a failure? No. I just accept that I don't have the time and patience to set it up, and would rather spend money on an OS that starts working within an hour. (The Vista installation is goddamn fast.)
How do you define the number of exploits? The absolute number over the years doesn't matter TODAY. If it is the number of serious unpatched exploits, Windows Vista currently has ZERO, just like OS X and Linux.
Just as you said, patches != exploits. I'll go a step further and say that patched exploits != exploits.
That you know of...
Conspiracy theories FTW!
...and the bubble of no 0-day exploits on OS X is just waiting to burst.
I guess because on Windows if there's a vulnerability there's an exploit already written and working.
Sometimes. Not always. See last month's patches. None were 0-day.
Apart from full colour ASCII star wars, there's a free binary news server with 40+ TB data!
List of stuff.
they had VIDEO cards being labeled Vista Compatible and they wouldn't work with vista
The key word being HAD. The driver incompatibilities haven't been there for a while now.
Haven't you learnt already? He's a troll. That's all. Set him as a foe, set foes to -6, and be done with it. It's useless conversing with this guy and his sockpuppet.
Clods. Insensitive clods.
This risk is still there with current domains. In fact, it should be easier with the .bank TLD -- just make sure that there are *no* .bank entries in the hosts file.
As TFA has stated, this is not a silver bullet. It won't magically solve all the problems with phishing. However, this, along with user education, can ameliorate the situation. For example, a newbie can be told to make sure that the word "bank" appears before the first slash, and so on. Not perfect, but definitely better than the current system.
Count me in as a supporter.
"Weighs" IIRC is an acceptable substitute for measuring the mass.
What will you say, "it masses 7.3 tonnes?"
Even better?!? That's what the CD-i games did.
Oh, come on. .NET isn't for Hello World programs. Hello World running faster in C tells you jack squat about performance vs .NET, or the features.
...as someone's said above, this is overstepping rational bounds, not legal ones. The article is negative publicity for Flickr. Now a person may think twice before posting something there.
The release version doesn't, but the latest *beta* does.
Hmm. As for Creative, an alternative driver does exist, the latest beta (3538m, find it in the forum) of which does support Vista on all SoundBlaster Live! and other unsupported cards. They work great.
I'm aware that there are other devices that don't work with Vista, but I've got all of mine (some of which are quite old) to work, either with Vista-supplied drivers, or with Windows XP drivers. The situation is hardly as bad as it is sometimes made out to be.
On what? That IE7 was developed independently of Vista?
Of course it was developed independently. It was released long before Vista was.
They are correct in a sense.
While IE can be removed from Windows XP (I'm not sure about Vista) using XPlite, doing so breaks a lot of other things in Windows (help files etc). Trust me, I've tried it.
I can see the argument for it, although I'll disagree. When I say "Vista" I mean the kernel + the subsystems (graphics, audio, network etc) + the security layer (UAC, digital signatures). The internet browser bundled with the OS -- especially when it is made available for another couple of OSes, and the development team is not part of the Vista development team -- doesn't count as part of the OS.
Plus, you have the choice of browser. You do not have the choice of subsystem or kernel.
The help files are non-essential stuff, so you can technically use Vista or XP without ever seeing IE. I cannot say the same for the other things.
Indeed, none of the flaws were in Vista itself. If I'm reading the bulletin correctly, all of the flaws were in IE7, which was developed quite independently of Vista.
I like what a commenter on reddit said. (paraphrasing) Porn is the magma under the surface -- you can find it anywhere if you go deep enough.
Besides, note that Google has a Volcano Fortress.